TragicMonkey
Poisoned Waffles
It doesn't limit free speech at all. You can express whatever you want. You just can't control how popular your expression is going to be.
It doesn't limit free speech at all. You can express whatever you want. You just can't control how popular your expression is going to be.
Ziggurat
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Jun 19, 2003
- Messages
- 61,585
Sorry, but that isn't making the case for protectionism. If culture is identity, then people should have as much free choice, and as little government coersion (which includes subsidized programming) as possible. Anything else is an unnecessary and damaging intrusion of government into private lives.
Try again.
The only limitation you present is what people want to hear. Sounds pretty democratic to me. Why do you have a problem with that?
You also fail to understand the difference between a natural limit on free speech (I cannot force you to listen to what I have to say) and a RESTRICTION on free speech (a third party prevents me from saying something to you that you want to hear). A free market has plenty of the former, but none of the later. You seem to not like that arrangement, and prefer the later to the former.
That is an example of government censorship.
Again in the US and EU your choice of food supplies is limited by government regulation, not some corporate agenda.
So bilingual education (except for increasing proficiency), wearing funny native dress and such should be restricted. Right?
Jorghnassen
Illuminator
- Joined
- Nov 14, 2004
- Messages
- 3,942
A few questions:
Do you think that Moroccan movies can resist Hollywood movies ?
Is it good for the Moroccan people to be cut from their roots and projected into a foreign culture, with no alternative ?
Is it wise for the USA to be considered the cause of the disappearance of a local culture in the name of free trade ?
"Between the weak and the strong, it is freedom which is oppressive and law which is protective"
Montesquieu (one of them Frenchies you so detest)
Do you think that Moroccan movies can resist Hollywood movies ?
Is it good for the Moroccan people to be cut from their roots and projected into a foreign culture, with no alternative ?
Is it wise for the USA to be considered the cause of the disappearance of a local culture in the name of free trade ?
"Between the weak and the strong, it is freedom which is oppressive and law which is protective"
Montesquieu (one of them Frenchies you so detest)
What do you mean by "resist"? If Moroccan people want to watch Hollywood movies, they will. If they want to reject Hollywood movies and watch Moroccan movies instead, they will. This is not a matter of "no alternative". They are given alternatives: Watch Hollywood movies, or watch Moroccan movies. You just don't want them to choose one of those alternatives.
Freedom oppressive and law protective...not a view I happen to hold. I'll file that under "Yet another reason I'm glad I live in the US."
Actually, bilingual education is often a hot political issue here in the US. The arguments made are similar to the one you are making. And they are usually made by far-right conservatives.
..in order to protect our cultural heritage....Actually, bilingual education is often a hot political issue here in the US. The arguments made are similar to the one you are making. And they are usually made by far-right conservatives.
Jorghnassen
Illuminator
- Joined
- Nov 14, 2004
- Messages
- 3,942
Well, can't wait until some Hollywood studio sues the NFB under NAFTA for lost profits...
Last edited:
What do you mean by "resist"? If Moroccan people want to watch Hollywood movies, they will. If they want to reject Hollywood movies and watch Moroccan movies instead, they will. This is not a matter of "no alternative". They are given alternatives: Watch Hollywood movies, or watch Moroccan movies. You just don't want them to choose one of those alternatives.
Freedom oppressive and law protective...not a view I happen to hold. I'll file that under "Yet another reason I'm glad I live in the US."
The problem is that the economic structure of movie making, and the way how movies are distributed insure that US made movies have a overwhelming advantage over almost any other movie industry.
Most cultures don't have as much mass appeal as commercial US mass culture. US culture has traditionally catered to the largest number of people possible, and there's nothing wrong with that. The US invented the concept of popular culture! But popular culture is not the only legitimate type of culture there is. In comparison, most european culture was created by cultural elites, aimed at them, and transmitted to larger shifts of the population only progressively and after some time has elapsed. This originally elitist cultural heritage constitutes nevertheless the backbone of European culture, even in such domains as religion, folklore, music, eating habits, manners and more generally daily life. That doesn't mean that European culture has no value or importance. Relatively few Europeans initially listened to Mozart, or read Goethe or saw a play by Moliere. But the influence of these guys was enormous.
The small, restricted, linguistically limited European markets cannot compete with the American market. That's why they must be protected. The same applies to Canada, specially to Quebec.
Last edited:
Right. Which is exactly what Orwell is talking about. But when people do it here in the US, they are called intolerant bigots. I am curious as to whether or not Orwell is going to accept being lumped in with far-right conservative politicians in the US. Because they are making the exact same argument.
Actually, bilingual education is often a hot political issue here in the US. The arguments made are similar to the one you are making. And they are usually made by far-right conservatives.
Well, since I'm not a partisan hack, I got no problems with that.
Right. Which is exactly what Orwell is talking about. But when people do it here in the US, they are called intolerant bigots. I am curious as to whether or not Orwell is going to accept being lumped in with far-right conservative politicians in the US. Because they are making the exact same argument.
And it's not the same argument. Not exactly, and for one simple reason: the US is a cultural elephant. Most other cultures are weak and small in comparison. People who do that in the US are defending the strong against the weak.
Last edited:
Ummmm....this does not really make sense. Lotta things going on, mmovies and mass culture then narrow culture that is addressed by the mass culture thing but indiginous targeted things don't do well etc. etc. don't get it.
TragicMonkey
Poisoned Waffles
Why is the weak automatically entitled to protection? Maybe it's weak because it sucks? If the people of culture A want to consume products and entertainment from culture B, who are you to tell them they shouldn't, they should stick to culture A stuff no matter how much it stinks?
Weak and strong do not factor at all in my decision making of what is right and wrong. In my view of the world, they have no relationship to each other.
European and Canadians can see as many US movies as they wish. Nobody is restricting access to US stuff. What people are trying to do is to ensure that non-US culture survives and stays healthy, so that there's an alternative to the US stuff.
This involves a certain number of cultural quotas and cultural subsidies. I got no problem with it. Most Canadians and most French (along with the entire world except the US and Israel) have no problems with it.
